[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

# Re: Not understanding eval traceback (Seconded)

- Date: Sat, 11 May 1996 09:30:29 PDT
- From:
- cc: moo-cows@parc.xerox.com
- Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
- In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19960511155227.0068375c@pop.kaiwan.com>

    On Sat, 11 May 1996 slayer@kaiwan.com wrote:
    > At 08:40 AM 5/11/96 PDT, Saint Erroneous wrote:
    > >On Sat, 11 May 1996, Geoffrey King wrote:

    > >> In case you're dubious, here is the entire train of events:
    > >> Entered the following:
    > >>   @verb me:r6 this none this
    > >>   @edit me:r6
    > >>   "return 6;
    > >>   compile
    > >>   quit
    > >>   eval caller:r6()

    > >> Got back:
    > >>   wizard>> eval caller:r6()
    > >>   #-1:Input to EVAL, line 1:  Verb not found
    > >>   ... called from built-in function eval()
    > >>   ... called from #57:eval_cmd_string (this == #2), line 18
    > >>   ... called from #57:eval*-d (this == #2), line 10
    > >>   (End of traceback)

    > >You forgot to set the verb to be +x, so eval won't be able to find it.

    > hm I thought when you made a verb 'this none this' and didn't specify the
    > permissions it made it 'rxd' by default?

    Quite correct. That'll teach me to think I know what I'm doing. *duaha*

    Does it give the same traceback if you call the verb as
    "eval player:r6()" instead?

    -michael

References:

- Re: Not understanding eval traceback (Seconded)

- From: slayer@kaiwan.com

- Prev: Re: Not understanding eval traceback (Seconded)
- Next: Re: Not understanding eval traceback (Seconded)
- Index: MOO-cows
- Thread: MOO-cows

Home | Subject Index | Thread Index